Hoi.
[2020-03-25 01:08] "Simon Thelen" <foss...@c-14.de>
> [2020-03-24 23:38] Philipp Takacs <phil...@bureaucracy.de>
> > [2020-03-24 08:56] markus schnalke <mei...@marmaro.de>
> > > [2020-03-23 21:46] Philipp Takacs <phil...@bureaucracy.de>
> > > >
> > > > A updated version of my patches is attached, including the updated
> > > > man pages.
> > >
> > > Please add a HISTORY section to the mh-sequence(7) manpage with
> > > some explanation about the removal of the Previous-Sequence, so
> > > that people, who search for it, are informed that it was removed
> > > and why.
> > >
> > > Then it's ready to commit, I'd say.
> >
> > OK I have added following:
>
> I tried editing the wording a bit to make it read better.
>
> > --- a/man/mh-sequence.man7
> > +++ b/man/mh-sequence.man7
> > @@ -263,5 +263,24 @@ in your profile with an empty value.
> > .SH "SEE ALSO"
> > flist(1), mark(1), pick(1), mh-profile(5)
> >
> > +.SH "HISTORY"
> > +.SS Previous\-Sequence
> > +Earlier versions of
> > +.B mmh
> > +supported the `Previous\-Sequence'.
>
> This sequence stored the selected messages for the previous mmh command.
> It was disabled by default because it introduced a lot of extra writes to the
> .mh_sequences file.
> Additionally, it introduced possible race conditions when running multiple
> mmh commands in parallel.
> The feature was removed for these reasons.
> [..]
I further suggest to change the last sentence:
As this feature was rarely used, it was removed.
The reason for the removal is not that it is technically
difficult (MIME or the unseen sequence are difficult as well).
It probably motivated Philipp to look at it in the first place,
but the true reason for the removal is that we don't really
need the feature. The technical difficulty just makes it more
attractive to remove a hardly used feature.
Or to look at it from a different perspective: There's not
enough gain from it's high technical cost. But for this
perspective, the previous sequence is not the beste example.
Here the reason really is that it is hardly used and hardly
necessary to cover even non-standard usecases.
Great to see mmh rolling again! :-)
meillo
